User talk:TripCyclone
Welcome Hi, welcome to Midkemia Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Jimmy the Hand (novel) page. If you need help, and there are no local admins here, you may want to visit the forums on the Community Central Wiki. You can also check our Staff blog to keep up-to-date with the latest news and events around Wikia. Happy editing, Sarah Manley (help forum | blog) I think military units category (why Units with a capital U?) would be a good idea. Don't forget to add Natalese Rangers too. MoffRebusMy Talk 23:45, October 20, 2010 (UTC) Timeline good work researching all this. I found the information about the calendar in www.crydee.com. Have you read Servant of the Empire? I think I also found a discrepancy there. MoffRebusMy Talk 10:57, October 26, 2010 (UTC) Some suggestions Hi again... I see you have made a great work adding those characters. I'd like to make some suggestions about how I have worked so far so that the articles have some consistency between each other. You are not forced to follow them, but there is some logic behind it, which "works". *First of all, it's important to know where someone or something appears. Many wikis have an "Appearances" section which number the books/source where something appears. So when you make an article about Baron Someone, add a section and write the title of the story he appears (linked of course) *It would be a good idea to use past tense when you refer to events or persons. Riftwar occurred in some point of history and after that, many other events followed. If you were through the Serpentwar and suddenly read the article on Terrance in present tense, you will feel a bit out of place. You also say that he "Owns a nine-year-old bay named Bella". When did he own him and when were he nine? I guess he grew up afterwards :) :Of course "eternal" topics should remain in present. I don't think the Grey Towers were destroyed so you can refer to them in present. OTOH I think Kelewan is destroyed in a later book. *Then, I'd suggest we avoid titles like Baron etc. "Baron Summerville" perhaps was not born a baron and perhaps became something else later in life. An article Summerville (without title) would be more neutral and correct. *And finally, I support putting links in every name, no matter how insignificant is that character or name. I don't think that Red links are "evil". Linked names (even if red), are recognizeable entities for the wiki database and can be manipulated. Also, it saves you the trouble of looking for which articles could possibly mention that name if it becomes more important later. MoffRebusMy Talk 11:15, October 21, 2010 (UTC) Thanks for the reply. Of course the usage of titles in-text is ok and can be helpful; you don't have to change those. For example Duke Borric links to Borric of the Magician, not his grandson. As for the "spoilers", they are expectable in a wiki; a rule of thumb I follow concerning the level of detail is this: write details which are easily forgotten or overlooked after or during your first reading. If you are writing about characters, try to decide which details would be important from their point of view, eg. the first time he experienced something. A bad example is Wookieepedia, where editors try to flesh out the articles in order to compile a complete, concise and spherical narrative. See for example this biography of a Star Wars video game character with almost zero background. The quality of the text is great: it gives out a complete information on the character as a flowing narrative, and a section about his "personality and traits". But in order to achieve this, they also included a bulk of useless, indirect background information: you can spot two paragraphs about Vader, Leia and the Death Star plans, which are only indirectly relevant to that character's role; he doesn't interact with them at all. As a result, you have to spend time to read 11 paragraphs for an one-dimensional character. Exactly the same level of information could be given. MoffRebusMy Talk 23:58, October 21, 2010 (UTC) Kelewanians I chose to put the servant characters under "Kelewanians" since it's not sure that they were part of the Tsurani empire. They could have been Thuril captives, like Katala. MoffRebusMy Talk 01:26, November 1, 2010 (UTC) Novel categories *Hi, I really don't think we want to categorise in-universe articles (ie, characters), with out-of-universe categories (books), because then we're mixing IU and OOU and it can get confusing. Rather than categories by novel, I suggest we use the "Appearances" and the "References" tags to reference where they appear, in addition to putting a list of characters on the Book page. QuentinGeorge 20:58, January 18, 2011 (UTC) *Yes, that is one way to do it. But the goal isn't just to create a reference page of characters. By creating such a category, we provide an easy page that lists all items referenced by a particular book. While a list of characters might be useful, do you intend to have a list of all characters, creatures, locations, items, and concepts listed on each book page? Don't forget that doing this will also require frequent updates to the book page every time something is added to the list, as the list will eventually become rather large (maybe larger than the rest of the article). Creating a category page provides a simpler, automated way to do this. Plus, you can then put a "References" note on each book, linking to that book's category page. Providing a simple reference on each article is an option. For characters, the "Appearances" section does that. For everything else, a Reference section could be added. The problem with typical references using book/chapter/page is that there are several editions of the book, with minor changes in where information is found. Plus some things are referenced multiple times throughout the book, which can results in lots of reference tags littered throughout such articles. Again, it comes back to a simpler solution. Though I am wondering, how does this confuse IU and OOU? Would it be less confusing if I used "Silverthorn (novel)" instead of "Silverthorn" as the category title? BTW, nobody commented on my suggestion for this when I proposed the idea in early December (which I had pointed out to you so you could look at and provide your thoughts), so decided to start working on this during my next book update.TripCyclone 21:25, January 18, 2011 (UTC)